Bannon DC

Welcome back, Panzer Meyer .... the place to go for FINISHED scenarios is The Scenario Depot, sister site of the Proving Grounds. The original scenario depot folder a couple of years ago and Gary at The Proving Grounds set up a new site. www.the-scenario-depot.com The Proving Grounds is a fantastic site of course. It is specifically for the playtesting of new scenarios. Recommend scenarios? Well... all the "Bannon DC" stuff is great of course. But, you can see the top rated stuff, top downloaded stuff, etc. over there. There are still CM clubs around too if you are looking for opponents. You could also post here if you are looking. Cheers, Bannon

Ahahah... that is ironic. Philippe, it sounds like you need to blow a lot of stuff up to finally set yourself right. Keep shooting, pal. :)

I've got one that is set in Washington, DC. This is my neighborhood and there are some great bridges over Rock Creek Park. High heavy bridges. Good for H2H or axis vs. AI. So if you can get over the idea of Tiger Tanks rolling through the US Capital, you might like this one. Map just focuses on the Kalorama Neighborhood... not Capital Hill and White House. "Bridges at Kalorama Heights" http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=240 Here's one with a twist on bridge crossing. You "build a bridge" to replace a destroyed one. Engineers remove daisy chain mines to make the bridge passable. Fun but difficult. "Bridge Building" http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=467

Thanks to all for the kind words here and in the cross post under the CMBB forum. If you decide to play, let me know how it goes.

Post in the techical support forum. I suspect some one will see it here though. Look under the CMAK forum and you will see the tech support sub-forum. If you are new to the game, get some practice against the AI and then start playing against humans. Most fun against a "thinking" opponent. Good luck and welcome to the forum.

I will order this disc... always wanted to see the Battle of San Pietro. They also have a West Wall disc. Description is minimal. Could not find it listed at the Time Life site. Anyone seen it or found a better desciption?

Corrected the link for the second publication. (For some reason I could not edit the original)

The American 60mm mortar is equivalent to the CW 2 pdr and the Axis 50mm. It has a far better range than both with the CW 2 pdr being the least effective in terms of range. Ammo load out? Again the British 2 pdr comes out at the bottom of the list. IIRC you'll get in the neighborhood of 30+ rounds for the 60mm.

It is not so much Vista as the graphics card you have. What do you have? Someone more knowledgeable that I will come along shortly.

Are you looking for H2H or against the AI? I have a few large scenarios and ops: Recently released: Kalvin Square, Pest -- link to forum thread with some screen shots, etc. Best played as H2H or Axis vs. AI. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=3793 For against the AI -- "Heights -- to the top!" will challenge you. Play smart... the enemy sees you. http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/scenario_blog.html?scensku=609 Ops -- Margit Island -- Again in Budapest. 10 battles, an infantry slog in historical scale. Combined Arms, South to Kiev. -- a combined arms fight, early war CMBB (over 100 russian tanks vs far fewer Germans.) 5 battles (IIRC). You can find these at TSD under my name.

FYI -- Osprey is working on a book for the Stalin and Molitov defensive lines... release date Sept. 2008. http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/The-Stalin-and-Molotov-Lines-_9781846031922/ The book John K may have been referring to is Soviet Field Fortifications, 1941-45. A good book with many interesting illustrations. Similar to the German counterpart. http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/The-Stalin-and-Molotov-Lines-_9781846031922/

Could be a high level of trenches, foxholes, craters, burning tiles, etc. The more the landscape is changed the longer it takes. Could also have a lot more units on map than the other scenario. Or all of the above.

Great stuff. Read the Safi chapter. Here is the rest of the collection (this has been posted previously): http://www.history.army.mil/bookshelves.html These books contain great material for scenarios.

Do you have to be the Brits? Not much variety in terms of Commonwealth infantry... in CM in general, very few options in terms of infantry equipment unless you find a SMG squad. The American infantry has the bazoka, and the very effective 60mm mortar, plus the M1 Garand giving the squads more firepower. Watch out for the Engineer/Pioneer units. Since they are supposedly carrying their engineering equipment in addition to their weapons, they tire more quickly than standard infantry. Fine in an urban environment, but could be trouble crossing an open area in rural terrain. Depending on the terrain, you can buy a cheaper lower caliber AT gun. It would still be effective at 100m or so. If you are in an urban environment that may be as as much as you get. For dealing with Tigers, etc... you can try to draw the enemy closer to you and hope to ambush him. If you are using it to guard a flag in more open terrain, it could still be helpful depending on how much cover is nearby. For finding that big gun before it finds you... you have to go looking. If you can send an infantry squad beating through the trees you may stumble upon it before it finds you. Baiting it to fire at your infantry as Rankorian suggested is a good idea too. Good luck

There seems to be some controversy surrounding the development of the proximity fuse as to who gets the credit for it... the Brits or the Americans. The issue came up recently for me in a Charles Whiting book I was reading (Siegfried, the Nazi's Last Stand) where he mentioned "Now Houffalize was being pounded by Britain's latest secret weapon: the proximity fuse, a radar-directed shell with unprecedented accuracy and deadly effect." (Houffalize is about 20 miles north of Bastogne in the American operation sector). First, was it more accurate than normal ammunition... or was it just the air-burst effect that made it so special? On the issue of who developed it, I think it depends on which side of the Atlantic you live on. The US Navy was quite emphatic that it was an American development. The wording of the statement makes me think the controversy must have been hotly debated. "British scientists were working on proximity fuze devices for rockets and bombs at least as early as 1939. Captured documents indicate that German work on proximity fuze development had begun in the early 1930's, and was still in process when hostilities ended in the European Theatre. In brief, there is nothing unique about the "idea" of a proximity fuze. The possibility that proximity fuzes of various types might be feasible has been recognized for a long time. The American achievement, accomplished by no other country, was the actual development of a proximity fuze that would function and that could be manufactured by mass-production techniques." http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq96-1.htm#anchor1190487 I had some trouble with this site in terms of load time. Also, the article was cut off for me. Here is a longer excerpt: Development of Proximity Fuzes (VT) for Projectiles-VT Fuzes Mks 32 to 60 Introduction During the summer of 1940 shortly after the formation of the NDRC [National Defense Research Committee], work was started on the development of a proximity fuze. The initial development was undertaken by Section T of Division A of the NDRC. The initial project was very broad in objective; namely, to develop a proximity fuze of any type (radio, acoustic, photo-electric, electro-static, infra-red, etc.) for rockets, bombs, and projectiles. Such a project was assigned to Section T by the Navy. At the time this project was started, the primary objective was to provide better defense against aircraft. Methods of using proximity fuzes for this purpose then being considered included use in bombs for air-to-air bombing, use in rockets, and use in projectiles. At about the time this project was started, it was learned that the British had been developing proximity fuzes and had some considered to be fairly promising for use in bombs and rockets. The British had considered fuzes for projectiles, but felt that the technical difficulties in making such fuzes rugged enough to withstand firing from a gun were insurmountable, at least during World War II. While the original project covered all types of proximity fuzes, for rockets, bombs, and projectiles, a primary interest to the Navy was a proximity fuze for the Navy 5"/38 projectile, as this weapon was the Navy's principal antiaircraft weapon. Section T at the outset considered the development of the projectile fuze as a primary objective, and undertook investigations leading toward achievement of sufficient ruggedness of electronic parts and the like to permit firing from a gun. By the spring of 1941 work on the radio type of projectile fuze had progressed to the point where it appeared to he the most promising type of fuze, and at that time Section T dropped its work on investigation of other types of proximity fuzes and concentrated entirely on the radio-type of projectile proximity fuze. This development ultimately led to the present type of radio proximity fuze for projectiles and is the development with which this report is concerned. In addition to the U. S. Navy interest in the projectile proximity fuze, the British and the U. S. Army were also interested. Agreements were made that all projectile proximity fuze work would be carried out by the Navy and Section T. The Army had also entered the proximity fuze program, but in line with these agreements, the Army concentrated on proximity fuzes for rockets and bombs. The British had also started some work in Canada on the proximity fuze for British projectiles, and this development was carried out cooperatively with the Section T program. At that time the priorities for projectile proximity fuze development were set up as follows: (1) U. S. Navy, (2) British Navy, (3) U. S. Army, (4) British Army. The first development was a fuze, known as the VT fuze Mk 32, for the Navy 5"/38. This development was followed by modifications in design to permit adaptation of the projectile fuze to British Navy guns, U. S. Army guns and British Army guns. At that time the primary objective was to provide better defense against aircraft; and hence, the fuzes being developed were all antiaircraft fuzes.

Agreed. Mortars. Even better is to have the mortars in command with an HQ. That way you can move the HQ around as the spotter and be able to bring the gun under fire quicker. A 150mm is no AT gun. Your opponent would do better by scaling down to a 75mm AT gun which would be slightly more stealthy and quicker to load and fire... and more accurate and deadly.

I guess there is truth to the rumor... once you post 13,966 times you get banned. Now, he finally has time to figure out how many licks it really takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop.

Mal -- For number 3 -- when just starting to figure out how to use the editor, start small and basic. It will take some trial and error to get things right. For getting the AI to do what you want it to, consider that the AI behavior is very basis and not "smart" on any level what-so-ever. Playing with FOG off for the AI changes its behavior significantly. Don't test with FOG off. To see what the AI is doing, surrender often. Play a few turns, save and surrender. As for for what makes a good map or a good scenario... don't worry about it. Design first for yourself. If it is the type of map or scenario you would enjoy playing, you will have more interest in designing it and putting the effort in to make it work correctly. Head over to TPG for testing. Folks over there will be glad to help if you help others in return. Good luck.

Yup, POS is over at the Blitz now... the most recent place that hasn't kicked him out yet.

Cut-down Scenario Tank Trap at Muzeum Blvd. I released this scenario some time ago in order to test my tank trap idea. This scenario took a single major avenue from the Kalvin Square map. A group of Soviet pioneers with supporting armor and infantry is tasked with advancing down Rakoczi Ave. and clearing the tank trap at Muzeum Blvd. The obstacles in this scenario are a bit denser than in the full-scale Kalvin Square scenario but will give you a good idea of the traps and ambushes awaiting the Soviets. ] The view looking up Rakoczi Ave from the intersection at Jozsef Blvd.

Some images Google image matches the approximate size of the scenario map. The National Museum's grounds are the wooded area in the center of the map. Kalvin Square is just below it SW. The satellite view from Gellert Hegy. The Combat Mission view from Gallert Hegy. Attack and counter-attack... the Soviets retook positions lost along Ullio Ave. and threaten the Axis flank of forces holding Jozsef Blvd. (to the right) line forcing a withdraw to Muzeum Blvd (center). This is where the battle starts. ROOFS OFF -- I used combinations of heavy buildings and factories to depict larger buildings; this allows pathways through larger buildings that would not exist with heavy buildings alone. Turning roofs on and off (shift+r) helps to keep track of units and shows paths through buildings. A closer view looking SW at the grounds of the National Museum, Kalvin Square, and Muzeum Blvd. Roofs on.

Situation: The siege of Budapest has witnessed intense, non-stop street fighting. The routine has been attack and counter-attack. As the Germans and Hungarians have fewer and fewer men to hold the line, the fighting on the Pest side of the Danube River is reaching its conclusion. As of January 16, the Axis forces are within a few blocks of the river and two battered bridges are the last connections between Pest and Buda. The Ferenc Jozsef Bridge (to the south) collapsed overnight. Erzsebet Bridge (the only link depicted in this scenario) will be critical for the movement of Axis reinforcements and withdraw of certain units. Chain Bridge, off map to the north, was the last bridge standing and was destroyed on January 18 after the final retreat from Pest. A new defensive line is being established at Muzeum Blvd. The order for the final retreat from Pest had not been authorized but is expected at any time. The Axis forces have started moving HQ and other units to the other side of the river even as new forces are arriving to attempt to delay the Soviet advance. The Soviets hope to capture a bridge intact or cut of as many units as possible from retreating. Overlooking the Pest battlefield from across the Danube is the citadel atop of Gellert Hegy. In stark contrast to Pest with its flat terrain, Buda is hilly and rugged and has been a natural stronghold against numerous invasions through the centuries. During this invasion, commanders look down on Pest through binoculars and call in artillery on the enemy below. ------- Available at The Scenario Depot. Kalvin Square, Pest ------- If you enjoy urban combat scenarios (Military Operation in Urban Terrain -- MOUT), you will enjoy this scenario. Map is not very large (combat area is about 1K x 1K). The number of units is large, but manageable. Battle has been playtested and balanced for head-to-head play. Map is based on period and current maps of the area. The Soviets must rely on effective combined arms tactics and must accept casualties in order to advance. The Germans and Hungarians have been outflanked along Ullio Ave. and must conduct a fighting withdraw and move up reinforcements to establish a new defensive line at Muzeum Blvd. The Axis must also exit certain units as part of their withdraw. Artillery plays a key role for both sides. I specifically designed this scenario so that both sides will have critical decisions to make. The defender will be actively involved in every turn instead of just hitting "go" and seeing if his original set up holds the attacker. The Axis have a "rear area" to move and organize reinforcements and the units they must exit. A wise attacker will use some of his artillery in an intradiction role... if he can spare it. Most units start at full strength and the map starts with only limited rubble. Given the amount of firepower, the map will quickly assume a beat up condition... and so will your men. Recommended to play as head-to-head. Also plays well as Axis vs. AI (see play recommendations). Thanks to testers who have commented at TPG and play-tested this scenario with me and to those who have provided research info: George Mc, Charlie M., Highliner, Heinrich505, Umlaut (check out his urban terrain mod), and Bardosy. And, as always, thanks to GJK for supporting the CM community with his web sites.

This too was one of the first CMBB scenarios I ever played. I have not played it since, so therefore my thoughts are from fuzzy memory. Great thread to resurrect. Sportscliche, I believe your tactics sound good. This one is tilted a bit by time. You have to set your mind to blazing through the enemy by shock and firepower. Caution will lose this one, but your wouldn't know all this unless you had played it before. I think you need to put all your eggs in one basket and pick a flank and go all out. Think commando raid to get in the right mindset. Use the artillery for pre-planned bombardment and delay using the "Q" key to workover the area a few turns before the infantry hits it. If I recall correctly which is "ify", only the second wave had to exit for points. Use the first wave to attack and hold the door open. Don't go hunting down the rest of the Germans. Since the artillery is pre-planned you have to know the duration of the barrage which would be critical information to include in the brief. Allow three to five minutes. You can monitor it and advance your infantry accordingly. Avoid friendly infantry casualties because they could come by the squad as well as by the man with this heavy artillery. I think I botched this one in my first go. I wish I had known about the "Q" delaying key for pre-planned bombardment. Learn the hard way. :eek: Good luck

On the subject of British anti-tank infantry tactics... I have a scenario at TSD on the subject. (works best as two player) British Infantry AT Tactics 1940 I have always been amazed at the limited tools the British were equiped with. The British AT doctrine seems more theoretical than practical, even late into the war. Something to the affect of "the infantry needn't worry because they will always be supported by the other combat arms." Theory quickly fails on the battlefield when the enemy doesn't cooperate. To emphasize the point... from the British brief: "Now... you might be asking 'How are we going to fight tanks without tanks of our own.?'" "Don't you know?!" one of the men shouts causing an immediate stir among the assembled men. "No worries," the captain says confidently. "Allow me to read from the training pamphlet "Tank Hunting and Destruction" which I reviewed on the way here. I quote this inspiring passage: 'Tank hunting must be regarded as a sport - big game hunting at its best. A thrilling albeit dangerous sport, which if skillfully played is about as hazardous as shooting a tiger on the foot, and in which the same principles of stalk and ambush are followed."* "So," the captain said light heartedly, "we can be happy the Germans aren't riding into battle on the backs of tigers. Eheheh." The captain looks out at the blank stares of the group. The joke is obviously lost on the men. An "Operation Sealion" scenario matching British Infantry against German mechanized force in the village of Wains Cotting. Small map, small number of units. * Actual quote from the 1940 pamphlet describing tactics to be employed against German armor in an invasion of England.

Cut-down Scenario Tank Trap at Muzeum Blvd. I released this scenario some time ago in order to test my tank trap idea. This scenario took a single major avenue from the Kalvin Square map. A group of Soviet pioneers with supporting armor and infantry is tasked with advancing down Rakoczi Ave. and clearing the tank trap at Muzeum Blvd. The obstacles in this scenario are a bit denser than in the full-scale Kalvin Square scenario but will give you a good idea of the traps and ambushes awaiting the Soviets. ] The view looking up Rakoczi Ave from the intersection at Jozsef Blvd.